final winter 2012 survey report

1

Winter 2012 Survey Report

Talent Acquisition Practices in Greater Cincinnati

Staffing & Recruiting Committee

C

About this SurveyThe Staffing & RecruitingCommittee of the GreaterCincinnati Human ResourcesAssociation (GCHRA) surveysarea hiring managers twiceeach year in order to trackstaffing practices among areacompanies and organizations.

The Winter 2012 Survey wasconducted between late-January and mid-February2012.

A total of 135 hiring manag-ers responded to the onlinesurvey, representing 97 com-panies or organizations inGreater Cincinnati. The re-turn rate for the companiesor organizations was 12.7percent.

This rate is not strong enoughto say definitively that thedata is representative of thetalent acquisition community.The survey data, however,may be taken as guidance tothe state of talent acquisitionin Greater Cincinnati at thetime the survey was con-ducted in late-January andmid-February 2012.

Page

About this Survey 1

First Quarter 2012 HiringPractices 2

Qualifications Sought inCandidates 4

Employee Turnover 6

Recruiting Practices 7

Some Positions Difficultto Fill 7

Compensation 9

Social Media and CandidateSourcing Method 10

Demographics 11

Industry Groups 11

Location, Location, Location 12

Employees in Organizationsor Companies 12

Outlook for Second Quarter2012 13


C

Winter 2012 Survey Report

Talent Acquisition Practices in Greater Cincinnati


A comparison of the datareturned on the Winter 2012Survey to the same questionsasked in the Summer 2011survey showed consistency inthe data between the twosurveys.

Respondents completed a totalof 38 questions designed tomeasure practices in fourareas:

Hiring practices in thefirst quarter (January,February and March) of2012

Recruiting practices

Demographics of surveyparticipants and theircompanies or organiza-tions

The outlook for hiringpractices in the secondquarter (April, May andJune) of 2012

About this Survey

Page

About this Survey 1

First Quarter 2012 HiringPractices 2

Qualifications Sought inCandidates 4

Employee Turnover 6

Recruiting Practices 7

Some Positions Difficultto Fill 7

Compensation 9

Social Media and CandidateSourcing Method 10

Demographics 11

Industry Groups 11

Location, Location, Location 12

Employees in Organizationsor Companies 12

Outlook for Second Quarter2012 13

Table of Contents

About this Survey

2

percent of respondentsreported hiring only for newpositions.

Hiring data from the twosurveys also showed:

Hiring only to fill vacan-cies in existing positionswas reported by 28.3percent of the 2012respondents and 22.7percent of respondentsto the 2011 survey

Hiring to fill vacancies inboth existing positionsand hiring for newpositions was reportedby 61.6 percent ofrespondents in 2012 and76.1 percent ofrespondents in 2011

The 2012 survey found that15.5 percent of respondentsreported that their company ororganization was not hiring,compared to 15.2 percent of

respondents for the 2011survey. Among the reasonsfor not hiring cited by the2012 respondents were:

Hiring freeze – 42.9percent compared to50.0 percent in 2011

Rightsizing – 28.5percent compared to 35percent in 2011

Restructuring – 19.0percent compared to5.0 percent in 2011

Downsizing – 9.5percent compared to10.0 percent in 2011

Chart 1 displays the types ofpositions respondents reportedas filled for their companies/organizations during the firstquarter of 2012.

First Quarter 2012 Hiring Practices

Hiring during the first quarter(January, February and March)of 2012 was up slightly comparedto the 3rd quarter of 2011. Thatwas one of the findings amongrespondents to the Winter 2012Survey.

The 2012 survey found that 114respondents, representing 84.4percent of the total respondents,reported their company or or-ganization was hiring in the firstquarter. When the same ques-tion was asked of respondents inthe 2011 survey, conducted lastJuly, 82.7 percent of the respon-dents reported hiring by theircompanies or organizations.

Data from the 2012 surveyshowed that 10.1 percent of therespondents reported hiring fornew positions only. Newlycreated positions are generallyseen as indicators of a growingeconomy. The July 2011survey data showed just 1.1

Chart 1: Positions Filled in 1st Qtr. 2012by Percent of Total Responses for Each Position

(Respondents Could Select More than One Position Level)

20.4

31.6

51.0

49.0

44.9

44.9

64.3

22.423.5

Executive DirectorSupervisor/Manager Exempt - TechnicalExempt - Non-technical Non-exempt hourly - TechnicalNon-exempt hourly-Non-Techical Non-exempt salaried - TechnicalNon exempt salaried - Non-Technical

3

Chart 3: Positions Filled for Contract/Temporary Employees in 1st Qtr. 2012by Percent of Total Responses for Each Position


0 5 . 7 3 . 8

2 6 . 4

2 0 . 8

3 9 . 6

5 6 . 6

3 . 89 . 4

ExecutiveDirectorSupervisor/ManagerExempt - TechnicalExempt - Non-technicalNon-exempt hourly - TechnicalNon-exempt hourly-Non-TechicalNon-exempt salaried - TechnicalNon exempt salaried - Non-Technical

Survey participants were asked about hiring practices for contract/temporary employees during the firstquarter of 2012. Chart 2 displays data on the hiring status for contract/temporary workers.

Chart 2: Hiring Status for Contract/Temporary Employees* - 1st Qtr. 2012Displayed As Percentage of Yes or No Responses

(*defined as individuals who are NOT on company/organization's payroll and NOT benefits eligible)

18.535.3

25.638.3 38.4

81.564.7

74.461.7 61.6

0102030405060708090

100

HIRINGcontractors/temporaryemployees to fill what

were formerlyorganizational/company

jobs

ADDINGcontractors/temporaryemployees to fill newcontracting/temporary

jobs

REPLACINGcontractors/temporary

employees to fillexisting

contracting/temporaryjobs

HIRINGcontract/temporary

employees toeventually fill a

company position

Currently NOT HIRINGContract/Temporary

Employees

Hiring Status

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pons

es

Yes No

Chart 3 shows the types of positions for which contract/temporary employees were hired during the firstquarter of 2012.

Survey participants were asked about hiring practices for contract/temporary employees during the firstquarter of 2012. Chart 2 displays data on the hiring status for contract/temporary workers.

Chart 2: Hiring Status for Contract/Temporary Employees* - 1st Qtr. 2012Displayed As Percentage of Yes or No Responses

(*defined as individuals who are NOT on company/organization's payroll and NOT benefits eligible)

18.535.3

25.638.3 38.4

81.564.7

74.461.7 61.6

0102030405060708090

100

HIRINGcontractors/temporaryemployees to fill what

were formerlyorganizational/company

jobs

ADDINGcontractors/temporaryemployees to fill newcontracting/temporary

jobs

REPLACINGcontractors/temporary

employees to fillexisting

contracting/temporaryjobs

HIRINGcontract/temporary

employees toeventually fill a

company position

Currently NOT HIRINGContract/Temporary

Employees

Hiring Status

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pons

es

Yes No

4

Chart 4: Educational Qualifications Sought by Candidate ClassificationDisplayed as Response Percentage for Each Classification w ithin Educational Qualification(Respondents Could Select More than One Educational Level per Candidate Classification)

20.827.1

34.4

91.7

11.5

33.3

9.4 12.5

81.1

43.249.5

32.6

2.1

88.6

39.830.7

19.3

1.10.0

10.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.0

100.0

Hi gh sc hoolgr a dua t e s or

GED r e c i pi e nt s

P r of e ssi ona lCe r t i f i c a t e

P r ogr a ms f r oma c c r e di t e di nst i t ut i ons

Te c hni c a l orc a r e e r c ol l e ge

gr a dua t e s

Col l e gegr a dua t e s wi t h

Ba c he l or ' sde gr e e s

Unde r gr a dua t ei nt e r nshi ps

Col l e gegr a dua t e s wi t h

M a st e r ' sde gr e e s

Gr a dua t ei nt e r nshi ps

P ost gr a dua t ede gr e e s

( M a st e r , J . D . ,P h. D . , M . D . )

P ost gr a dua t ede gr e e s ( J . D . ,

P h. D . , M . D . )

Educational Qualification

Perc

enta

ge o

f Tot

al R

espo

nses

Exempt Classification Non-Exempt Classification Hourly Classification

Qualifications Sought in Candidates

Survey participants were asked about the educational and work ex-perience qualifications sought for exempt employee positions, non-exempt employee positions and hourly employee positions.

Based upon the top response for each of the three types of workers,these are the most sought after candidates for each type ofposition:

Candidates who are college graduates with bachelor-level de-grees and have two years through five years of experienceare the most sought after for exempt employee positions.

Candidates who are high school graduates or GED recipientsand have two years through five years of experience are themost sought after for non-exempt employee positions.

Candidates who are high school graduates or GED recipientswith less than two years experience are the most sought af-ter for hourly employee positions.

Chart 4 shows the educational qualifications and Chart 5 onpage 5 displays the work experience cited by respondents for thethree types of candidate classifications.

A poll conducted by the Society of Human Resource Management(SHRM) conducted in October 2010 found that 71 percent of compa-nies that provided training on diversity issues. In the same poll, 84percent of companies reported that their diversity efforts were veryeffective or effective.

The Winter 2012 Survey asked Greater Cincinnati hiring managersabout the diversity qualifications sought in job candidates.Chart 6 on page 5 displays the results for that question.

Exempt employees arethose defined by the FederalLabor Standards Act (FLSA) asbeing exempt from the FLSA’sminimum wage and overtimerequirements.

Non-exempt employees arethose who are subject to theFLSA’s minimum wage andovertime requirements. Non-exempt employees must re-ceive the higher of either thefederal or state minimumwage and must be paid at therate of one and a half timestheir regular pay rate for eachhour worked above 40 hours aweek.

Hourly employees are paid aset amount for each hourworked and must be paid thehigher of either the federal orstate minimum wage. Over-time pay is required if theywork more than 40 hours aweek.

5

Chart 5: Work Experience Sought in Candidates by ClassificationDisplayed as Response Percentage for Each Classification Within the Work Experience(Respondents Could Select More than One Work Experience per Candidate Classification)

24.7

81.7

57.0

19.416.1

69.1

76.6

21.317.0 16.0

82.0

60.7

19.1 18.0 15.7

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

Those with less than2 years experience

Those with 2 to 5years experience

Those with 6 to10years experience

Those with 11 to 15years experience

Those with 15+ yearsexperience

Work Experience

Perc

enta

ge o

f Tot

al R

espo

nses


Chart 6: Diversity Qualifications Sought in Candidatesby Percent of Total Responses for Each Qualification

(Respondents Could Select More than One Diversity Qualification)

90.9

77.9

58.4

79.2

Ethnicity Gender Disabled VeteransQualification:

6

Employee Turnover

Employee turnover represents a significant cost to a company and organization. The Winter 2012 Surveyasked participants to provide the percentage of turnover experienced in 2011 for exempt, non-exemptand hourly workers who were on the company or organizational payroll and eligible for benefits. Theturnover results are presented in Chart 7.

Chart 7: Employee Turnover in 2011 by ClassificationDisplayed as Response Percentage for Each Classification within a Turnover Range

38.5

34.6

12.5

3.8 3.84.8

1.0 1.0

34.7

27.6

15.3

10.2

5.13.1 3.1

1.0

29.2

21.919.8

8.37.3

6.35.2

1.0 1.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

0% - 4.9% 5% - 9.9% 10% - 14.9% 15% - 19.9% 20% - 24.9% 25% - 39.9 % 40% - 59.9 % 60% - 79.9% 80% - 99.9% Greaterthan 100%Turnover Ranges (Expressed in Percentages)

Perc

enta

ge o

f Tot

al R

espo

nden

ts


Employee Turnover

Employee turnover represents a significant cost to a company and organization. The Winter 2012 Surveyasked participants to provide the percentage of turnover experienced in 2011 for exempt, non-exemptand hourly workers who were on the company or organizational payroll and eligible for benefits. Theturnover results are presented in Chart 7.

7

Recruiting Practices

This section discusses the findings from survey questions that asked about three specific recruitingpractices: compensation, social media usage and candidate sourcing methods.

Table A

Typical Job PositionsReported as Being Difficult to

Fill

Business

Analyst, Accounting, Audit Senior Associatesand Managers, Finance, Branch Managers, As-sistant/Customer Service Managers, GeneralManager, Sales Executives, Sales Representa-tive, Entry Level Sales Trainee, Call CenterSales, Mortgage Processor, Project Managers

Computer/IT

Senior Application Developers, Data Modeler,Programmers, System Analyst, Flash Designer/Developer, Web Developer, Network Adminis-trator, Technology Services, IT contract posi-tions

Healthcare

Home Managers, Administrators, Dental Man-agers, Medical Assistants and Receptionists,Direct Care/Caregivers, State Tested NursingAides, Therapists, RN, Physicians, Obstetricians

Technical/Engineering/Manufacturing

Highly Niched Scientific and Technical Posi-tions; Chemistry Laboratory Manager; Microbi-ology Laboratory Manager; Mechanical andProcess Engineers; Machine Operators; CNCProgrammers; Skilled Trades from Tool & Dieto Maintenance; Narrow Web FlexographicPress Operators; Manufacturing Trainees;Maintenance Technician with Electrical Skills,Hourly Factory Workers

Other

Interior Designer, General Warehouse Associ-ates, Day Care Providers, Pre-K Head StartTeacher

Some Positions AreDifficult to Fill

It has been widely reportedthat hiring companies andorganizations are experiencingmore difficulty than expected infilling certain positions.

A survey conducted by RightManagement, a division ofManpower Group, in Novemberand December 2011 found thatU.S. employers reported moredifficulty in filling key positionsthan in 2010. In GreaterCincinnati, 53.1 percent ofrespondents to the 2012 surveyreported difficulties fillingcertain positions.

Table A presents the typicalpositions reported by surveyparticipants as being difficult tofill during the first quarter2012.

Among the reasons cited by2012 survey respondents fordifficulty in filling certainpositions:

Candidates don’t possessthe right work experi-ence (64.6 percent)

Candidates don’t possessthe right skills(54.2 percent)

Candidates don’t possessthe right educational/training background(31.2%)

Can’t find candidates inthe salary range (22.9percent)

Difficult to attract candi-dates to Greater Cincin-nati (12.5 percent)

Can’t find candidates in the hourly rate range (8.3 percent)

Lack appropriate educational/training opportunities inGreater Cincinnati (6.3 percent)

8

In addition to the responses indicated on Chart 8, respondents provided the following answers:

Signing bonuses, being more open to negotiation regarding benefits

Profit distribution into 401K, discount tickets/memberships/cell phones

Signing bonus for Teachers after six months, downtown parking paid by the Agency, wellnessbenefits (gym membership discounts, etc.)

We tell them we’re not within the city limits; we’re in one of the nicer suburbs. We try todistance ourselves from the City of Cincinnati.

Not actively attracting candidates to Greater Cincinnati. We don’t hire outside of Cincinnati.

Our openings are in the Indianapolis, IN area

This doesn’t apply to our hiring

41.5

20.7

32.9

26.8

39.012.226.8

30.5

51.29.8

Literature, maps, guides, websites, social media sites for GreaterCincinnati prepared by your company or organization

Literature, maps, guides, websites, social media sites for GreaterCincinnati prepared by other groups (e.g. Chambers of Commerce, realtyfirms, visitors bureaus, museums)

Relocation assistance (e.g., financial, moving, temporary housing, realestate, spousal/partner job-hunting assistance)

Provide face-to-face interaction with potential workplace peers, escortedtours or attendance at cultural/civic events to selected candidates duringrecruiting phase

Highly attractive benefits packages that exceed average benefitsofferings for the Greater Cincinnati area

Personal integration into community (e.g., introductions to members ofcivic/community groups, company volunteer activities in the community)for new hires

Career growth incentives such as professional association memberships,meeting or conference registration fees, seminar registration fees

Company perks (e.g., company car, Metro passes, tax assistance,increased insurance coverage, bonuses, stock options, financialplanning, tickets to sport or cultural events, company cafeteria, companyafter-work gatherings, company holiday party/picnic)Tuition assistance for employee and/or employee’s spouse/partnerand/or children

Paid memberships to civic/community/cultural groups or for health club

Chart 8:Actions/Incentives to

Attract QualifiedCandidates

to Greater Cincinnatiby Percent of Total

Responses for EachAction/Incentive

(Respondents Could SelectMore than One Action/Incentive)

Chart 8 shows the activities that Greater Cincinnati area companies and organization are using toattract qualified candidates to the area.

9

Compensation

Survey participants were asked if the salary and hourly rates paid to new hires in 2012 are higher,lower, or showed no change from those paid to new hires in 2011. Across all classifications, morethan 50 percent of staffing and recruiting managers reported that 2012 salary and hourly rates inGreater Cincinnati have not changed from those paid to new hires in 2011. Table B breaks out thedata on 2012 salaries and hourly rates.

Table B — New Hires2012 Salaries and Hourly Rates

Compared to 2011 Salaries and Hourly Rates(Reported as percentage of respondents’ answers within each level)

The survey also asked about salary increase ranges being paid to current employees for the currentfiscal year. Responses to this question are presented in Chart 9.

LEVEL:Supervisor,Manager,

Director andExecutive

LEVEL:Exempt

LEVEL:Non-Exempt

SalariedTechnical

andNon-Exempt

Salaried Non-Technical

LEVEL:Hourly

Technicaland

Hourly Non-Technical

Higher thanin 2011 39.2% 32.5% 30.0% 35.4%Lower thanin 2011 1.3% 1.2% 0.0% 0.0%No Changefrom 2011 59.5% 66.3% 70.0% 64.6%

Chart 9: Salary Range Increase Paid to Current Employeesin Current Fiscal Year

Displayed as Response Percentage for Each Salary Range within a Job Classification

31.1 29.524.7 26.4 27.7 28.6

32.126.1

32.529.5

2.2 1.1 1.1 2.4 2.4 2.3

10.012.5 11.2

13.89.6

14.3 16.7 18.215.6 16.7

45.650.0

56.2 55.2 56.6 54.851.3 53.4 51.9 53.8

4.4 4.5 4.5 2.3 2.46.7

3.4 2.2 1.1 1.20.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

Executive Director Manager Supervisor Exempt -Technical

Exempt -Non-

technical

Non-exempthourly -

Technical

Non-exempthourly-

Non-Techical

Non-exempt

salaried -Technical

Non-exempt

salaried -Non-

Technical

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pons

es

No Increase Less than 1% 1%-1.9% 2%-3.9% 2%-3.9% 8% or HigherSalary Ranges:

10

Social Media and Candidate Sourcing Methods

In the past few years, US business has moved from viewing social media asstrictly branding and advertising channels to social media as tools for businessprocesses, operations and engagement. Human Resources now uses socialmedia not only to create interest in the company among active job seekers, butalso as a tool for sourcing and recruiting passive candidates.

Survey participants were asked what percentage of their company’s ororganization’s human resources or recruiting annual budget is allocated tosocial media recruiting. The data from the Winter 2012 Survey show thatbudgets allocated to social media recruiting are trending up from thedata reported in the 2011 survey:

57.0 percent of respondents reported that less than one percent ofbudget is allocated to social media recruiting. This is up from the 54.5percent of respondents in the 2011 survey.

31.2 percent of respondents reported that between 1.0 percent and 4.9percent of budget is allocated to social media recruiting. This is slightlybelow the 31.3 percent of respondents in the 2011 survey.

6.5 percent of respondents reported that between 10.0 percent and 19.9percent of budget is allocated to social media recruiting. This is up fromthe 6.0 percent of respondents in the 2011 survey.

3.2 percent of respondents reported that between 5.0 percent and 9.9percent of budget is allocated to social media recruiting. This is downfrom the 7.1 percent of respondents in the 2011 survey.

2.2 percent of respondents reported that 20.0 percent or more of budgetis allocated to social media recruiting. This is up from the 1.0 percent ofrespondents in the 2011 survey.

LinkedIn is the big winner among the social media tools that surveyparticipants use in the recruiting and hiring process. LinkedIn is used by 83.1percent of the respondents. Survey participants were asked to indicate all ofthe social media tools used for recruiting and hiring new employees. The datashowed that in addition to LinkedIn, the following social media tools are used:

Facebook is used by 47.2 percent of respondents

Craig’s List is used by 36.0 percent of respondents

Twitter is used by 24.7 percent of respondents

Google+ is used by 11.2 percent of respondents

YouTube is used by 9.0% percent of respondents

Google Social Media Analytics is used by 3.4 percent of respondents

Survey data showed that 2.2 percent of respondents used the following forrecruiting and hiring purposes:

Online job board Monster

Industry specific websites

No social media

The following social media and online job boards are each used by 1.1 percentof respondents in the recruiting and hiring process:

Yammer.com

Bullhorn Reach.com

TweetMyJobs.com

Monster.com

Lur website

With so much social media avail-able for recruiting and hiring dostaffing and recruiting managershave confidence in the effective-ness of any other methods tosource candidates? The answer,according to survey participants is“Yes.”

We asked survey participantsto indicate the top three mosteffective sourcing methods.The runaway winner: employeereferrals, cited by 77.2 percent ofrespondents. The next two run-ners-up were commercial onlinejob boards (i.e., Monster, Career-builder), cited by 54.5 percent ofrespondents and the company’sor organization’s website, citedby 38.6 percent of respondents.

Survey respondents cited thefollowing effective sourcingmethods in addition to the topthree:

23.8 percent cited socialmedia

20.8 percent cited job fairs/campus career services

19.8 percent cited referralsfrom industry contacts

17.8 percent citedadvertising in traditionalmedia (i.e., newspapers,magazines, professionaljournals, TV, radio, cable)

13.9 percent each citedsearch firms andprofessional associations/conferences

12.9 percent cited rehires offormer employees

5.5 percent cited formercollege interns or formerCoOp students

2.0 percent each citedcollege/university websitesand military websites

11

Demographics

This section of the survey asked questions about the companies and organizations represented by thesurvey participants.

Industry Groups

Survey participants were asked what industry group their company or organizationbelonged to based upon standard industry classification. Table C presents the industriesreported by survey respondents.

Table C

Survey Participants by Industry Group

Industry Group

Percentageof

Respondents

Non-profit 16.7

Healthcare 16.7

Manufacturing 13.0

Education 7.4

Brand management 7.4

Financial – banking, insurance 5.6

Employment and staffing services 5.6

Retail 3.7

Information technology 3.7

Government – federal, state, local 3.7

Transportation 1.9

Telecommunications 1.9

Restaurant/Hospitality 1.9

Media and entertainment 1.9

Marketing and sales 1.9

Logistics 1.9

Employee leasing/PEO 1.9

Construction 1.9

Aviation management 1.9

Architectural services 1.9

Agribusiness 1.9

12

Location, Location, Location

Data from the 2012 survey showed that the Greater Cincinnati area serves as animportant location for the companies and organizations represented by therespondents:

60.8 percent of respondents reported that their national/global headquarters is located in thetri-state area

21.6 percent of respondents said their regional/divisional headquarters is located in the tri -state area

9.3 percent of respondents reported that their subsidiary headquarters is located in the tri -state area

Just 14.4 percent of respondents reported that their national/global headquarters is locationoutside the tri-state area

Employees in Organizations or Companies

The 2012 survey asked participants about the distribution of employees. Table D shows thepercentage of respondents who indicated their company or organization had employees or contract/temporary employees in specific locations.

Table D

Number of Employees in Organizations or CompaniesRepresented by 2012 Survey Participants

(Reported as Percentage of Respondents / Grey Shading = No Response)

Number ofEmployees

Employees in theTri-State

Contract/Temporary


Employees in theEntire Company/

Corporation

Less than 10 2.0% 72.0% 2.0%

11-50 6.9% 16.1% 4.0%

51-100 16.8% 5.4% 9.0%

101-250 27.7% 3.2% 23.0%

251 or more 3.2%

251-500 13.9% 10.0%

501-1,000 9.9% 6.0%

1,001-2,000 6.9% 8.0%

2,001 or more 15.8%

2,001-5,000 14.0%

5,001-10,000 9.0%

10,001-15,000 3.0%

15,001-20,000 2.0%

20,001 and above 10.0%

Employees in Organizations or Companies

The 2012 survey asked participants about the distribution of employees. Table D shows thepercentage of respondents who indicated their company or organization had employees or contract/temporary employees in specific locations.

Table D

Number of Employees in Organizations or CompaniesRepresented by 2012 Survey Participants

(Reported as Percentage of Respondents / Grey Shading = No Response)

Number ofEmployees


Contract/Temporary


Employees in theEntire Company/

Corporation

Less than 10 2.0% 72.0% 2.0%

11-50 6.9% 16.1% 4.0%

51-100 16.8% 5.4% 9.0%

101-250 27.7% 3.2% 23.0%

251 or more 3.2%

251-500 13.9% 10.0%

501-1,000 9.9% 6.0%

1,001-2,000 6.9% 8.0%

2,001 or more 15.8%

2,001-5,000 14.0%

5,001-10,000 9.0%

10,001-15,000 3.0%

15,001-20,000 2.0%

20,001 and above 10.0%

13

Outlook for Second Quarter 2012

The Winter 2012 Survey asked participants about anticipated hiring and staffing issues for the secondquarter (April, May and June) of 2012. According to the survey data, 83.0 percent of respondents re-port that their company or organization anticipates hiring during the second quarter.

For those respondents who reported an anticipation of hiring in the second quarter:

56.6 percent anticipate hiring both to fill existing vacancies and hiring for new positions

35.3 percent anticipate hiring only to replace employees who leave vacancies in existingpositions

Just 8.2 percent anticipate hiring only to add employees in new positions.

The following three charts show data on the anticipated hiring in the second quarter 2012. Chart 10displays data on the anticipated positions to be filled during second quarter 2012. Chart 11 on page 14shows the anticipated hiring for contract/temporary employees during the second quarter 2012. Chart12 on page 14 displays data on the type of positions anticipated to be filled for contract/temporaryemployees.

Chart 10: Positions Anticipated to be Filled in 2nd Qtr. 2012by Percent of Total Responses for Each Position


13.318.1

43.4

45.8

41.051.8

62.7

21.7

24.1


The Winter 2012 Survey asked participants about anticipated hiring and staffing issues for the secondquarter (April, May and June) of 2012. According to the survey data, 83.0 percent of respondents re-port that their company or organization anticipates hiring during the second quarter.

For those respondents who reported an anticipation of hiring in the second quarter:

56.6 percent anticipate hiring both to fill existing vacancies and hiring for new positions

35.3 percent anticipate hiring only to replace employees who leave vacancies in existingpositions

Just 8.2 percent anticipate hiring only to add employees in new positions.

The following three charts show data on the anticipated hiring in the second quarter 2012. Chart 10displays data on the anticipated positions to be filled during second quarter 2012. Chart 11 on page 14shows the anticipated hiring for contract/temporary employees during the second quarter 2012. Chart12 on page 14 displays data on the type of positions anticipated to be filled for contract/temporaryemployees.

Chart 10: Positions Anticipated to be Filled in 2nd Qtr. 2012by Percent of Total Responses for Each Position


13.318.1

43.4

45.8

41.051.8

62.7

21.7

24.1


14

Chart 11: Anticipated Hiring Status for Contract/Temporary Employees*2nd Qtr. 2012

Displayed As Percentage of Yes or No Responses(*defined as individuals who are NOT on company/organization's payroll and NOT benefits eligible)

13.626.2 26.2 27.0

38.5

86.473.8 73.8 73.0

61.5

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.0

100.0

ANTICIPATE HIRINGcontractors/temporaryemployees to f ill w hat

w ere formerlyorganizational/company

jobs

ANTICIPATE ADDINGcontractors/temporaryemployees to f ill newcontracting/temporary

jobs

ANTICIPANT REPLACINGcontractors/temporary

employees to f ill existingcontracting/temporary

jobs

ANTICIPATE HIRINGcontract/temporary

employees to eventuallyf ill a company position

DO NOT ANTICIPATEHIRING

Contract/TemporaryEmployees

Hiring Status

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pons

es

Yes No

Chart 12: Positions Anticipated to be Filled for Contract/Temporary Employees in 2nd Qtr.2012

by Percent of Total Responses for Each Position(Respondents Could Select More than One Position Level)

3 . 1 3 . 1

18 . 8

4 6 . 9

2 1. 9

4 0 . 6

6 5 . 6

6 . 39 . 4

ExecutiveDirectorSupervisor/ManagerExempt - TechnicalExempt - Non-technicalNon-exempt hourly - TechnicalNon-exempt hourly-Non-TechicalNon-exempt salaried - TechnicalNon exempt salaried - Non-Technical

final winter 2012 survey report

Documents